Site Sponsor

I have a 1999 mustang gt that I want to make fast. Any ideas on the cheapest or most reliable way to do this? What about turbos or superchargers? I was also considering a crate engine.

Click to expand...

You can put a '99 GT in the 12s without touching the engine. Especially if it's a 5-speed.

4.10 gear, suspension upgrades, sticky tires, CAI, exhaust, maybe some weight reduction, and drive it like you stole it. You are there! Boost or nitrous would make it even faster!

I had a stock 99 GT 5-speed which ran 13.89 @ 99 with a 1.99 60-foot time. The mods I listed above would drop that 60-foot into the 1.6Xs, and add some power, which would put you in the 12s. Boost or nitrous would make you skip the 12s and drop down into the 11s.

work on the suspension, and add a roll bar to be legal at those speeds. should get there no problem without breaking the bank, having to do anything crazy/one off, or turning it into a tin can racecar. obviously there will be other small aesthetics and add ons along the way - tires, big and littles, clutch, etc.

Well, if its stock, I would say get a new spoiler that is at a 30 degree angle or if you really want, go 40 or 45 but can add drag, then go for cold air intake (not sure if 99 had a good one or not) get aluimium drivshaft with 4.10 gear ratio, take out spare.... get custom tune if you want also, along with spray. Result- Increased rear down force, better gear ratio with less weight with the addition of a new cold air intake it would allow for better cumbusion along with power. Add spray... well that says it all.

Well, if its stock, I would say get a new spoiler that is at a 30 degree angle or if you really want, go 40 or 45 but can add drag, then go for cold air intake (not sure if 99 had a good one or not) get aluimium drivshaft with 4.10 gear ratio, take out spare.... get custom tune if you want also, along with spray. Result- Increased rear down force, better gear ratio with less weight with the addition of a new cold air intake it would allow for better cumbusion along with power. Add spray... well that says it all.

Decrease weight and add rear downforce increases rear grip which increases how much power is transfered to ground which decreases wheel spin therefor increased track time.
Rear downforce can start providing downforce around 60 miles an hour cutting mil seconds off time due to increased rear grip. If you have a 30% spoiler it would allow downforce to be aplied while not sacificing for drag which would increase time.
If you think im wrong then why do professionals with 3k+ hp motors have a narrow chassis and a body that is only 1/4" off the ground.

I would agree that downforce does improve ET's in 3000 HP cars turning 180 - 260 MPH trap speeds but with smaller pockets and and a car in the 300-400 HP range turning 90-110 MPH trap speeds I would say a spoiler as described will not make a bit of difference in final ET. Reducing the cars ride height, thus reducing the frontal drag profile could make some difference but then most of our cars have the front suspension fully articulated under accelleration eliminating that benifit but shifting load to the rear tires impoving traction.

The NoS Spray and 4.10 gear sudjestion above would by far be the cheapest route for the OP to get 12's out of his car with the addition of some drag radials. That is until the engine gives up... then it gets even more expensive.

Decrease weight and add rear downforce increases rear grip which increases how much power is transfered to ground which decreases wheel spin therefor increased track time.
Rear downforce can start providing downforce around 60 miles an hour cutting mil seconds off time due to increased rear grip. If you have a 30% spoiler it would allow downforce to be aplied while not sacificing for drag which would increase time.
If you think im wrong then why do professionals with 3k+ hp motors have a narrow chassis and a body that is only 1/4" off the ground.

Click to expand...

Your wing statement is inaccurate/irrelevant on many accounts:
1. He's using a stock chassis. There are many other areas of the vehicle which need aerodynamic improvement before a rear wing. A wing which would create significant enough downforce to have a noticeable change would need to be mounted directly to the chassis (usually through the cage) not the rear trunk lid.
2. The above mentioned wings are $2000+ and 72"+ wide.
3. In actual track testing, the driver of my Cobra and other drivers using wings (mostly C6 guys that I talk to) are not noticing any appreciable difference below 100mph. Even on a road course such as NJMP, the areas where stock chassis cars are doing those kinds of speeds are very limited. 9 to 10 degree spoilers have been the best compromise of rear grip and least loss of mph on the back stretch (top end). The distance between the base of the spoiler and the top of the decklid as well as the distance of the front of the wing to the base of the rear window have both had more affect than the angle of the spoiler in relation to the ground.
4. The most needed area of "hook" is in the first 60'. Considering the amount of air moving across the wing in that first 60', the wing is doing absolutely nothing.
5. For anything other than drag racing, improving the rear grip of a stock Fox4 chassis only increases the part-throttle understeer of these cars (or, for you NASCAR fans out there, "tight" or "push").

Need I continue? I can keep going. Those were the cliffnotes. Aerodynamics will increase speed, but this is a cost/benefit thread. Your wing suggestion is nothing more than an aesthetic modification which will probably slow the vehicle down if anything.